【作者】 李志超；

【导师】 靳玉乐；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 课程与教学论， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 任何一项课程政策从提出到执行,总是需要面对理想和现实、当下和未来的碰撞与抉择。结合我国政治、经济、社会发展的现实需要,通过对“自上而下”的集权式课程管理体制和“自下而上”的分权式课程管理体制进行比较与分析、认知与自省,《基础教育课程改革纲要(试行)》提出了“三级课程管理”。它的形成过程,既要打破坚持以稳定强于一切的保守心理形成的极“左”思潮,又要革除信奉推倒重建式的革命心理形成的激进盲目的极“右”思维,在从“国家本位”的精英先导路径转向主导社会民主进程的渐进理路中,寻求课程建设的良方。《礼记·礼运》言,“大道行,天下为公。”三级课程管理权力运作的公共场域应当是教育真正能够体现育人成才、培养创造性人才的地方,应当是教育内在独有的一套逻辑发展规律能够转化为现实的地方。坚持以课程当事人的“和合共生”之大爱为价值砥柱,以完善健全的课程改革“制度链”为中坚保障,最终实现课程管理的“公共”鹄的。由于课程参与者的复杂性和多样性,三级课程管理体制中,必然会出现课程当事人从自身利益出发作出的权力博弈。三级课程管理的权力运作研究,通过揭示国家、地方和学校的权力失范,意在明确它们应有的责任和担当,从而使课程改革最大限度体现公平和正义,使课程改革最大程度满足其参与者的需要,为建设中国特色、中国风格、中国气派的课程改革提供条件和保障,实现课程管理权力的“软着陆”。论文尊重事实,以应然取向——实然分析——追踪探源——善治之道为基本研究线索,充分运用包括教育学、哲学、社会学等多学科的相关理论,坚持言之有理、论之有道的方式,进行深入探讨。全文共分以下八个部分：第一部分,导论。本部分系统介绍和分析以三级课程管理的权力运作作为论文研究主题的原因,澄明了研究的价值所在,经过对前期相关研究梳理,在不断地探讨“这是谁的权力”的基础上,进一步追问“如何行使权力”。坚持从现实场景中发现问题,借助理论予以阐释；同时,通过对现实的描述来分析理论,使理论走出“假”、“大”、“空”的阴影,实现理论与实践的双向交映。第二部分,三级课程管理的权力构成。三级课程管理进入人们的视野,最先是以政策的方式出现。政策文本本身,又具有某种合法化、权威化和制度化。论文借用话语分析法,以“回到”的方式、“经过”的姿态,对相关“政策群”这一宏大叙事的“思想观念”进行把脉,就“三级课程管理”的权力定位基础、权力主体构成、权力职责等问题进行深入探讨。第三部分,三级课程管理权力运作的价值诉求。文章坚持和合之学是三级课程管理的基本价值取向,指出由国家、地方和学校三级课程管理层次的有效整合,需要在课程建设中坚持尊重差异的和生诉求、和平共处的和处诉求、与人为善的和立诉求、共生共存的和达诉求、达泽天下的和爱诉求。惟以此,方能“化干戈为玉帛”,实现利益相关者的“共赢”。第四部分,三级课程管理的权力分配。如果把中国的课程改革比作一个大蛋糕的话,那么,蛋糕难做,蛋糕更难分。因为,在分蛋糕的过程中,往往产生着利益纠葛和权力争执。具体来说,“过密化”的国家层面权力分配在课程决策权、教科书编审权、课程监督权、财务权等方面呈现出一系列病理症候群；“中梗阻”的地方层面权力分配在课程自主权、课程执行权等方面仍有些问题亟待解决；“去主体”的学校层面权力分配则在课程领导权、课程执行权等方面出现纰漏。第五部分,三级课程管理的权力实施。国家、地方和学校三级课程管理层次在“自组织”化的课程环境中相互影响,彼此之间在“离场”的同时“在场”。国家、地方和学校三级课程管理层面在“动”的过程中又分别不同程度地异化着课程管理体制的预设目标。在动态化的“权力流”影响下,受“目标置换”困扰的国家层面表现出力求规避风险决策思维、“改革疲惫”的决策执行力、权威僭越的行动逻辑、缺少制度层面对共识的保障；政策规避的地方层面则表现出政策敷衍下的明哲保身、政策缺损下的断章取义、政策附加下的唯利是图、政策替换下的固步自封；“杂草丛生”的学校层面则在课程改革过程中表现出保守化、附庸化、形式化和实用化倾向。第六部分,三级课程管理的权力调控。这是对国家、地方和学校在课程改革过程中是否充分而有效地行使“在手之上”的权力,进行拷问。研究发现,国家层面尚存有监督评价机构自主权缺失、教育质量监督体系常态化缺位、法制体系规范有待健全；地方层面则集中表现在政绩工程导致改革两层皮、激励机制匮乏造成改革动力不足；至于学校层面,则突出反映在“核数文化”浸染下的评价导向偏差、“两种文化”割裂下的评价手段避重就轻、“被选择的人”主导下的评价对象锁定。第七部分,三级课程管理权力运作偏离的探源。通过“行动者——环境——制度”的动力系统演绎方式,对三级课程管理权力运作的偏离进行了深度剖析。就行动者而言,行动者的认知参与结构化、行动者的有限理性规约化,是发生偏离的潜在因素；从环境层面考虑,测不准的偶然事件、文化地景的时空转换,是发生偏离的可能条件；聚焦于制度层面,制度取向的“自行贬值化”、制度变迁的“反向诱致性”、制度定型的茧式化锁定,则是发生偏离的必然成分。第八部分,三级课程管理权力运作的改善。论文认为,“底线共识”和“顶层设计”的有效结合,是三级课程管理权力运作进一步改善的基本立足点。课程建设有着源发于教育学的内在力量,而不是一纸空文的行政指令。因此,三级课程管理权力运作的改善,需要彰显合情(符合国情的存在之真)、合理(合乎规范的存在之美)、合法(有章可依的存在之善)的基本原则；体现实践关怀的交往理性、民主自由的文化氛围、形神兼备的分布式领导和管办分离的制序等专业品质；坚持以问题解决的自组织制度建设为前提,理论自主的课程行动研究为动力,“认同”走向“承认”的主体间性理解为条件,督导监督为保障的实践准则。更多还原

【Abstract】 From the proposition to the implementation of any curriculum policy, there demands the collision of ideal and reality. The Outline for Basic Education Curriculum Reform put forward the Three-level managerial System of Curriculum after analysing and comparing the contralized curriculum managerial system with the decentralized curriculum managerial system, according to the reality demands of pilitics, economy and society development of China.lt needs not only breaking the Leftist Thoughts which insists that stability is above all else, but also abolishing the Rightist Ideology which insists that there is urgent need to tear down all the else to form it. We should seek the recipe to curriculum construction during the process of turning the elites’ leading which is based on the national to democracy’ leading.It is said in "Book of Rites Liyun" that A Public Spirit Will Rule all under the Sky When the Great Way Prevails. The field perspective of the power operation of three-level curriculum management is where there reflects that the education can nurture creative talents, and also reflects that the law of the development of the internal logic can become reality. We should insist on the universal love of curriculum litigants as the mainstay, the perfect curriculum reform system as the guarantee so as finally to realize the public curriculum management.As for the complication and diversity of the curriculum participants, there is to be power confrontation resulted from the the pursuit of selfinterest in the three-level managerial system of curriculum.The prupose of the study of the three-level managerial system of curriculum is to clear the responsibility of the country, provinces and schools in curriculum construction,to embody the justice of curriculum reform,to make curriculum reform meet the needs of participants, to provide conditons and guarantee to build Chinese curriculum reform, and finally to realize the soft landing of curriculum managerial power.The article is based on the facts, and the basic research line is what is going to realize, the conditon, the origin, and the perfect governace, fully using relavant theories, mading a valid point to deepen discussion. The article is divided into eight parts.Part one, introduction. This part introduces the reason why I chose the power operation of the three-level managerial system of curriculum as the topic, clearing the value of the study, and furthur questions that how to exercise power through the prior study and the study of whose power it is. The study insists on the combination of theories and questions, discovers questions from reality, and at the same time analyses the theory by description of the reality so as to avoid the phony and exaggeration that is always reflected in theories.Part two, the power conatruction of the three-level curriculum management. The three-level curriculum management first appears into the sight of us was in the form of policy which is legal, authority and institutionalized. The article deepen discusses the foundation of power location, the power subject construction and power responsibility by analysing discourse through the past, the process and relavant policies.Part three, the research that the value of the power operation of three-level curriculum management. The article insists that harmony is the value orientation of three-level curriculum management, and we should respect difference, keep peaceful coexistence, be friendly, be symbiosis and embrace the world in the effective integration of three-level curriculum management.Only in this way can we turn the swords into plowshares and finally reach the win-win situation.Part four, the power distribution of three-level curriculum management. It is hard to implement the curriculum reform, and it’s even harder to divide it because of the power in it.Specifically, involutionary national power distribution has some problems in curriculum decision power, textbook edit power, curriculum supervise power and fiannce. There are some problems to be solved in in curriculum autonomy and curriculum implementation for local power distribution which is blockage of the middle. There are also some problems in curriculum leading and curriculum implementation for school-level power distribution which is desubject. Part five, the power implementation of three-level curriculum management. National, provincial and school-level curriculum management affect in curriculum environment which is self-organized. The three levels alien proposed goals of curriculum management system differently. Affected by the dynamic power flow, the national level which is disturbed by target replacement represents the thought to avoiding riskr, exhausting decision implementation, power transgression and the scarcity of the institutional guarantee for consensus, and the provincial level which evades policy represents policy perfunctory, mercenary, resting on its laurels, and the school level which is full of many voices represents conservative, vassal, formal and practical in curriculum reform.Part six, the power control of the three-level curriculum improvement. It is a question about whether our state, local and schools exert the power "in hand" fully and effectively or not in the process of curriculum reform. In the research, we found the deficiency of autonomous right in supervision and evaluation still exists. There is a usual absence in our education quality supervision system, and the legal system needs to be improved in the perspective of our nation. The main questions about the local are the differentiation of reform because of vanity projects and the insufficient reform dynamics for the lack of incentive system. As to the level of schools, it particularly shows the deviation of assessment orientation under the "nuclear culture", the avoiding important things in assessment under the divided "two cultures", and the limit of the main objects under the leading of "the selected person".Part Seven, the inquiry of three-level curriculum management power operation deviation.Through the power system of "actors, environment and institution", the three-level curriculum management power operation deviation is deeply inquired.As far as actors is concerned, the constructional cognizance participation and limited rational normalization of actors is the underlying factor. As far as environment is concerned, accident incident which is inaccurate to test and the space-time transiton of culture and geography is the possibility. As far as institution is concerned, institution-oriented self-devalue, institution-transitonal reverse indection and institution-stereotypia lock-in is the certain factor.Part eight, the improvement of the power operation in Three-level curriculum management. In my opinion, combining "the bottom line" and "the top-level design" effectively is the basic foothold to further improve the power operation of the three-level curriculum management. Curriculum construction is not a useless letter of administrative instruction, but a kind of power from the inner strength of pedagogy. Consequently, the improvement of the three-level curriculum management power operation, it needs to show reasonable, rational legal basic principles which is coincidence with national conditions, beauty of norms and the rules-based kindness in the improvement of the power operation in three-level curriculum management. And it also should reflect the communicative rationality of practice care, freedom and democracy culture atmosphere, distributed leadership which is the unity of form and spirit and professional qualities in the order of separation between management and execution. At the same time, we are supposed to adhere to do on the premise of the system construction and action research and serve action researches as power. It is necessary to treat intersubjectivity understanding as conditions and make supervision to ensure the standards of practice.更多还原